'I'm pleading with the attorney-general to do so for the sake of my son's and family's dignity,' says the father of sodomy complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan
What conclusion can we draw from Rodwan’s refusal to respond to such serious allegation in Malaysia Today? Wouldn’t he have promptly refuted the allegation if it were untrue?
Kim Quek
The sodomy allegation against Anwar Ibrahim has all but collapsed on the day he was charged in court (Aug 7), following several events that occurred simultaneously on that day.
First, there was the surprise climb-down of the charge from the anticipated “sexual assault” to one of consensual sodomy. After a month-long propaganda campaign by the UMNO-controlled media depicting Anwar as a sex-offender, when even the prime minister alluded to “rape” on the eve of court hearing when questioned whether the complainant would also be charged, the prosecutor’s charge of Anwar under Section 377B of the Penal code (for consensual sodomy) was an anti-climax.
It gives the impression that despite all the high drama of high-handed police actions and tough talks by top political leaders, the fact remains that police have failed to come up with basic evidence to prosecute and prosecutors have to scramble at the last moment to put up a makeshift charge. This impression is further strengthened by the prosecution’s failure to produce a list of witnesses – a departure from the norm where the list is ready when the prosecutor presses the charge in court. This is in addition to the highly abnormal and unethical police conduct of persistently failing to give the accused a copy of the police report lodged by complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan more than a month ago without reason.
Second, even hours before the court session, Dr. Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid whose medical report had earlier stunned everyone with his finding that Saiful was not sodomised, dropped another bombshell – this time having his statutory declaration (dated Aug 1) and a medical statement (dated June 30) published in Malaysia Today’s website, re-affirming his earlier finding with indisputable clinical details while alleging police harassment and distortion of his testimony. He intimated, at the end of his affidavit, that in order to escape such constant harassment he has since left Malaysia with his family for their own safety.
Dr. Osman’s affidavit, which details what transpired during his examination of Saiful hours before the latter’s police report and the subsequent encounters with the police, exudes unquestionable professional integrity and should serve as a powerful deterrent to any one who may contemplate to concoct physical evidence of sodomy on Saiful.
Third, Anwar’s lawyer Sankaran N. Nair disclosed after leaving the court that his client had a watertight alibi, which was already disclosed to the police during their interrogation on Anwar earlier. At the material time of the alleged offence (3.01 pm to 4.30 pm on 26 June 2008), Anwar was having a meeting with several of his friends in the condominium apartment mentioned in the charge.
Anwar later explained that he often used the apartment which belongs to “a very close family friend” to conduct secret meetings with government leaders, businessmen and politicians. On the day of the alleged sexual assault, he was having talks there with an economist and a former banker, among others, to discuss economic strategies for the Pakatan Rakyat-controlled states. The police have already questioned those involved in the meeting, in addition to questioning owners of the apartment for 25 hours.
SAIFUL’S SECRET MEETING WITH POLICE
If there is any lingering doubt of Anwar’s plea that “This is a malicious and treacherous slander, I am not guilty” which he repeated twice before Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court judge S M Suppiah, then the revelation by Malaysia Today of a secret meeting between Saiful and a senior police officer three days before the police report should be sufficient to put the issue to rest.
In an article dated 30 July 2008, titled “Rodwan met Saiful three days earlier” under the column “The Corridors of Power” inMalaysia Today, the writer disclosed that Senior Assistant Commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof met Saiful at 2.30 pm on July 25 in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. Prior to the meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke on the phone at least eight times. Three days later, on July 28, Saiful visited Hospital Puswari at 2 pm where he was examined by Dr. Osman. Four hours later, he was at Kuala Lumpur Hospital (KHL) where he reported to the police that he was sodomised by Anwar on July 26.
On the same day the article was published (July 30), SAC Rodwan was asked whether he really had a secret meeting with Saiful three days before the police report, and Rodwan answered that he was not prepared to respond to this issue, according to the Oriental Daily dated July 31.
And Rodwan is noted for his dubious role in the infamous trials of Anwar ten years ago, as explained in a statement by Anwar’s lawyer R. Sivarasa:
“In 1998-1999 trials, Anwar experienced the phenomenon of fabrication of DNA evidence. We had SAC Rodwan illegally removing DNA samples from forensic custody. In cross-examination of the prosecution’s witnesses it was exposed that DNA taken from blood samples was planted on the infamous mattress.”
What conclusion can we draw from Rodwan’s refusal to respond to such serious allegation in Malaysia Today? Wouldn’t he have promptly refuted the allegation if it were untrue? What discussion he could have had with Saiful in such secret meeting if it was not about Saiful’s impending accusation against Anwar?
Now, the crucial question that will reveal the truth: If there was a pre-plan to fix Anwar as indicated by the Rodwan-Saiful meeting, why didn’t Saiful rush immediately (after the sodomy) to the KHL where Anwar’s semen could be extracted from Saiful’s anus and its DNA matched with a previous sample collected from Anwar ten years ago, if it was true that Saiful was sodomised by Anwar on July 26? Why should Saiful have waited for two days before visiting Hospital Puswari?
It is important to note that when Saiful met Dr. Osman on July 28, he complained of anus pain for two days, and said he could not sit down because of such pain. It was only after Dr. Osman completed the examination and told Saiful he found no abnormality in his anus that Saiful intimated that he was sodomised by a VIP (no name mentioned) and wanted to make a police report. Thereupon Dr. Osman advised Saiful to visit a government hospital as it was a criminal case.
The inference we can draw from this sequence of events is that Saiful would not have dared to visit any doctor for an anus examination on July 26, the day he was allegedly sodomised, because there was no sodomy.
His visit to Hospital Puswari on July 28 to complain of anus pain for two days was probably done with the purpose of procuring a prescription for his so-called anus pain with only a perfunctory examination. Little did he know that he would be subjected to a thorough rectal examination through a proctoscope as that performed by Dr. Osman.
However it is looked at, it is not credible that a man of normal intelligence like Saiful could have failed to go for a medical examination immediately after a genuine sodomy when there is a plot to fix the sodomist. The only explanation for such failure is that sodomy never took place.
First, there was the surprise climb-down of the charge from the anticipated “sexual assault” to one of consensual sodomy. After a month-long propaganda campaign by the UMNO-controlled media depicting Anwar as a sex-offender, when even the prime minister alluded to “rape” on the eve of court hearing when questioned whether the complainant would also be charged, the prosecutor’s charge of Anwar under Section 377B of the Penal code (for consensual sodomy) was an anti-climax.
It gives the impression that despite all the high drama of high-handed police actions and tough talks by top political leaders, the fact remains that police have failed to come up with basic evidence to prosecute and prosecutors have to scramble at the last moment to put up a makeshift charge. This impression is further strengthened by the prosecution’s failure to produce a list of witnesses – a departure from the norm where the list is ready when the prosecutor presses the charge in court. This is in addition to the highly abnormal and unethical police conduct of persistently failing to give the accused a copy of the police report lodged by complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan more than a month ago without reason.
Second, even hours before the court session, Dr. Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid whose medical report had earlier stunned everyone with his finding that Saiful was not sodomised, dropped another bombshell – this time having his statutory declaration (dated Aug 1) and a medical statement (dated June 30) published in Malaysia Today’s website, re-affirming his earlier finding with indisputable clinical details while alleging police harassment and distortion of his testimony. He intimated, at the end of his affidavit, that in order to escape such constant harassment he has since left Malaysia with his family for their own safety.
Dr. Osman’s affidavit, which details what transpired during his examination of Saiful hours before the latter’s police report and the subsequent encounters with the police, exudes unquestionable professional integrity and should serve as a powerful deterrent to any one who may contemplate to concoct physical evidence of sodomy on Saiful.
Third, Anwar’s lawyer Sankaran N. Nair disclosed after leaving the court that his client had a watertight alibi, which was already disclosed to the police during their interrogation on Anwar earlier. At the material time of the alleged offence (3.01 pm to 4.30 pm on 26 June 2008), Anwar was having a meeting with several of his friends in the condominium apartment mentioned in the charge.
Anwar later explained that he often used the apartment which belongs to “a very close family friend” to conduct secret meetings with government leaders, businessmen and politicians. On the day of the alleged sexual assault, he was having talks there with an economist and a former banker, among others, to discuss economic strategies for the Pakatan Rakyat-controlled states. The police have already questioned those involved in the meeting, in addition to questioning owners of the apartment for 25 hours.
SAIFUL’S SECRET MEETING WITH POLICE
If there is any lingering doubt of Anwar’s plea that “This is a malicious and treacherous slander, I am not guilty” which he repeated twice before Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court judge S M Suppiah, then the revelation by Malaysia Today of a secret meeting between Saiful and a senior police officer three days before the police report should be sufficient to put the issue to rest.
In an article dated 30 July 2008, titled “Rodwan met Saiful three days earlier” under the column “The Corridors of Power” inMalaysia Today, the writer disclosed that Senior Assistant Commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof met Saiful at 2.30 pm on July 25 in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. Prior to the meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke on the phone at least eight times. Three days later, on July 28, Saiful visited Hospital Puswari at 2 pm where he was examined by Dr. Osman. Four hours later, he was at Kuala Lumpur Hospital (KHL) where he reported to the police that he was sodomised by Anwar on July 26.
On the same day the article was published (July 30), SAC Rodwan was asked whether he really had a secret meeting with Saiful three days before the police report, and Rodwan answered that he was not prepared to respond to this issue, according to the Oriental Daily dated July 31.
And Rodwan is noted for his dubious role in the infamous trials of Anwar ten years ago, as explained in a statement by Anwar’s lawyer R. Sivarasa:
“In 1998-1999 trials, Anwar experienced the phenomenon of fabrication of DNA evidence. We had SAC Rodwan illegally removing DNA samples from forensic custody. In cross-examination of the prosecution’s witnesses it was exposed that DNA taken from blood samples was planted on the infamous mattress.”
What conclusion can we draw from Rodwan’s refusal to respond to such serious allegation in Malaysia Today? Wouldn’t he have promptly refuted the allegation if it were untrue? What discussion he could have had with Saiful in such secret meeting if it was not about Saiful’s impending accusation against Anwar?
Now, the crucial question that will reveal the truth: If there was a pre-plan to fix Anwar as indicated by the Rodwan-Saiful meeting, why didn’t Saiful rush immediately (after the sodomy) to the KHL where Anwar’s semen could be extracted from Saiful’s anus and its DNA matched with a previous sample collected from Anwar ten years ago, if it was true that Saiful was sodomised by Anwar on July 26? Why should Saiful have waited for two days before visiting Hospital Puswari?
It is important to note that when Saiful met Dr. Osman on July 28, he complained of anus pain for two days, and said he could not sit down because of such pain. It was only after Dr. Osman completed the examination and told Saiful he found no abnormality in his anus that Saiful intimated that he was sodomised by a VIP (no name mentioned) and wanted to make a police report. Thereupon Dr. Osman advised Saiful to visit a government hospital as it was a criminal case.
The inference we can draw from this sequence of events is that Saiful would not have dared to visit any doctor for an anus examination on July 26, the day he was allegedly sodomised, because there was no sodomy.
His visit to Hospital Puswari on July 28 to complain of anus pain for two days was probably done with the purpose of procuring a prescription for his so-called anus pain with only a perfunctory examination. Little did he know that he would be subjected to a thorough rectal examination through a proctoscope as that performed by Dr. Osman.
However it is looked at, it is not credible that a man of normal intelligence like Saiful could have failed to go for a medical examination immediately after a genuine sodomy when there is a plot to fix the sodomist. The only explanation for such failure is that sodomy never took place.
only fifty beggers for saifool including kataks roslan kassim the politicisation of sexuality as a political weapon as seen for the second time in the case of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. The case highlights the continuous usage of the archaic and outdated sodomy law to persecute an individual of his personal dignity and political ambitions. … Read more WHO THE FUCK IS IBRAHIM ALI ?BILA JUBOQ SAIFOOL TAK DAPAT SELAMATKAN UMNO.. JUBOQ IBRAHIM ALI DIMINTA
The prosecution have yet to decide whether they will appeal the High Court’s decision which today acquitted Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim of a sodomy charge.Speaking to FMT, chief prosecutor Mohd Yusoff Zainal Abidin said that he would have to let his colleagues who are on the case to decide on the matter as he will be retiring come February 1. He, however, said that any decision to appeal would be based on the written judgment.
“We have to look into the written judgment in detail. The facts of the case remains the same, the evidence hasn’t changed. Maybe there was something new that the Judge saw that we missed.
“But we need the written judgment to make an informed decision whether to appeal or not,” he said, adding that he “will definitely give my input if they will appeal the matter.”
Yusof said the prosecution team has about 10 to 14 days to put in their application of appeal and a decision would most likely be arrived at by then.
Asked if he was caught by surprise over High Court judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah’s decision early this morning, Yusof laughed and said: “I am as stunned as everyone else…I don’t know what to say”.
‘I accept Allah’s will’
This sodomy case, the second in Anwar’s political career, began when the Permatang Pauh MP was charged with having sodomised former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan three years ago.
After a lengthy court proceedings which began in 2010, the High Court decided today that it was not 100 per cent sure that the DNA evidence was not compromised. Hence, Anwar was acquitted and discharged.
In a separate matter, Saiful Bukhari, said through his twitter account that justice would be served in the “hereafter”. He who was absent from court today tweeted: “Not in this world, but definitely in the hereafter. I accept God’s will. Will be calm, pray and be patient”.
He also hoped that the A-G would appeal the decision. The prosecution have yet to decide whether they will appeal the High Court’s decision which today acquitted Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim of a sodomy charge.
Speaking to FMT, chief prosecutor Mohd Yusoff Zainal Abidin said that he would have to let his 
colleagues who are on the case to decide on the matter as he will be retiring come February 1. He, however, said that any decision to appeal would be based on the written judgment.
colleagues who are on the case to decide on the matter as he will be retiring come February 1. He, however, said that any decision to appeal would be based on the written judgment.“We have to look into the written judgment in detail. The facts of the case remains the same, the evidence hasn’t changed. Maybe there was something new that the judge saw that we missed.
“But we need the written judgment to make an informed decision whether to appeal or not,” he said, adding that he “will definitely give my input if they will appeal the matter.”
Yusof said the prosecution team has about 10 to 14 days to put in their application of appeal and a decision would most likely be arrived at by then.
Asked if he was caught by surprise over High Court judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah’s decision early this morning, Yusof laughed and said: “I am as stunned as everyone else…I don’t know what to say”.
‘I accept Allah’s will’
This sodomy case, the second in Anwar’s political career, began when the Permatang Pauh MP was charged with having sodomised former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan three years ago.
After a lengthy court proceedings which began in 2010, the High Court decided today that it was not 100 per cent sure that the DNA evidence was not compromised. Hence, Anwar was acquitted and discharged.
In a separate matter, Saiful Bukhari, said through his twitter account that justice would be served in the “hereafter”.
Saiful who was absent from court today tweeted: “Not in this world, but definitely in the hereafter. I accept God’s will. Will be calm, pray and be patient”. He also hoped that the A-G would appeal the decision.
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been acquitted of sodomising Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan but is unlikely to rest easy while his accuser is pushing the public prosecutor to appeal, the Wall Street Journal reported today.
The opposition leader’s bid to move forward and win voter support for his Pakatan Rakyat (PR) alliance in its fight against Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s Barisan Nasional (BN) on economic reforms is likely to be crimped by lingering allegations over his sexuality brought on by the sodomy case.
The influential US daily said the two-year courtroom drama was far from over for Anwar and for Malaysia’s 28 million people, suggesting that Saiful may still play a key role in the next few months.
In an article titled, “What’s next for Anwar’s accuser?” the newspaper reported that Saiful had worked briefly to help Anwar’s opposition campaign in the landmark Election 2008 that saw the PKR-DAP-PAS parties win a third of the 222-seat Parliament, denying the BN its traditional supermajority.
“Volunteers such as Mr Saiful helped make a crucial difference,” the WSJ said.
Following Anwar’s acquittal, political and economic observers say PM Najib may call for elections as early as March to capitalise on his feel-good Budget 2012 and push forward political and economic reforms to strengthen Malaysia’s competitiveness amid a wobbly world economy.
The BN’s mandate only expires in mid 2013.
Saiful, under heavy fire from Anwar’s supporters, has taken to social media channels Twitter and Facebook to voice his thoughts.
The 26-year-old former Anwar aide and his family insist the sodomy happened and has publicly pushed for continued legal action, “My family and I hope the prosecution will bring this case to the Appeals Court.”
The Attorney-General has about two weeks to decide if they plan to appeal the High Court’s acquittal of Anwar. They have not said anything on that score.
The PKR advisor and de facto head of the PR pact was charged with sodomising former aide Saiful at a posh condominium in upscale Damansara Heights in June 2008, months before winning his old Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat in a by-election.
Anwar maintains the sodomy charge was politically motivated to stop his march towards Putrajaya. Najib’s government had denied the allegation.
The WSJ also reported that there is enough uncertainty around the sodomy case to suggest that Malaysian voters have made up their minds about Anwar’s sexuality and are unlikely to budge.
It highlighted last year’s sex video scandal released by three of Anwar’s former friends-turned-foes, which they claim shows the 64-year-old having a sex with an alleged prostitute.
“Mr Anwar and his family deny he is the man in the tape, but the lingering controversy suggests that Malaysia’s political dramas might continue for months yet,” the newspaper said.
Anwar has been acquitted and freed. Najib, Rais, Muhyiddin and others point glowingly to the outcome of the trial; Anwar and “the opposition” point bitterly to the fact of the trial.
The top job is at stake. The office of Prime Minister is so powerful, many want it. Najib has it, Anwar wants it – as do Muhyiddin and others.
My friend Chris asked whether Anwar, like Neo, is “the one?” Najib tells us he’s the one. UMNO-BN tells us Muhyiddin’s the one. Pakatan tells us Anwar’s the one.
We all want saviours, people who set things right. Americans thought it was Obama (after Bush). Iraqis thought it was Saddam. Some Koreans think it’s Kim III.
We want leaders who ‘get’ what the problem is, who know what to do, who can do it. We want leaders who can see clearly, act wisely and bring real change.
Some want careful study before action: they want the infinite number of possibilities to be weighed, and “the right decision” made. Others want speed – China
Not everyone will be happy all the time. Decisions must be made. Fairly. Najib’s track record is part of the public record.
Teoh Beng Hock died during Najib’s watch; no one has been held responsible. BERSIH 2.0 and Ambiga were attacked, vilified. Perkasa gained traction. Pak Lah’s decision not to form a Police Commission was upheld. The E06 were mistreated. Two honey pots (Saiful & a callgirl) were used to vilify Anwar. Najib’s in charge.
Sex, cow and pig heads, racist principals and history-as-propaganda gained prominence under Najib’s watch. The MFC/Wanita UMNO scandal is condoned. The civil service was bypassed through Pemandu. A Senior police officer’s career was ruined through a staged trial (thankfully a judge acted uprightly). Najib’s in charge.
Najib used the resources of the state against Anwar. Anwar should never have been charged for Sodomy II, let alone vilified by the apparatus of the state and of UMNO-BN. Utusan runs riot and vilifies non Malays and Christians. Najib’s in charge.
Mahathir has re-surfaced under Najib’s watch. Muhyiddin runs riot. Hishammuddin re-writes the peaceful assembly bill into a no-assembly bill. Khir Toyo enriches himself, makes false allegations: an elected rep. and a journalist are detained. Cronies are appointed to PETRONAS, whose accounts remain state secrets. Najib’s in charge.
Perak was re-taken by Barisan through the machinations of Najib. Some would say he exercised the same skills in the case of Saiful/Anwar.
That’s the problem. We think it’s all about Najib, and we look for someone to compare him with; someone on ‘the other side’; Anwar. We forget the other UMNO-BN elected reps. who condone all these things by their silence.
It’s really about UMNO-BN; Najib was only doing what was good for the leaders of UMNO-BN. It’s really about the power struggles within UMNO. It’s really about UMNO leaders losing patronage benefits in Selangor, Perak and Penang .
It’s about the collapse of MIC, MCA, Gerakan. It’s about the rape of Sarawak under Taib. It’s about the whole country recognizing the leaders enriched themselves, and have to continue enriching their cronies in order to remain in power.
We have good things to say about PAS and DAP. There are leaders of the calibre of Tok Guru, Khalid, Karpal, Kit Siang and Guan Eng.
The DAP has turned Penang around: even Malay contractors in Penang approve of the DAP. Selangor has stood it’s ground against the Federal government, re. water treatment and supply. Both Selangor andPenang have Freedom of Information Acts. There is actual proof of acting upon beliefs not exclusive to any race or religion.
Anwar has been acquitted and freed. Now that the attempted perversion of justice has failed, let’s get real about Anwar.
Anwar was groomed by Mahathir to be his successor. The only reason Anwar is not Prime Minister today is because he was impatient: he wanted to oust Mahathir, he didn’t want to wait for Mahathir to hand over the reins.
Anwar was Prime Minister in waiting while multiculturalism was eroded through state-sponsored racism via Biro Tata Negara, citizenship-in-exchange-for-votes, falsification of history, favouritism for Malays, etc.
Anwar played a part in all these. PAS and DAP contended with him before. Now they’re with him because they know he has insights which can help topple UMNO-BN. And he has the leadership and political skills to keep disparate parties together.
I believe in repentance: a turning away from previous ways. An alcoholic can only reform if he admits he’s done wrong, needs help. It’s no different in politics.
Some say after his incarceration, Anwar changed. What wrongs has he admitted? Has he confessed? Has he admitted guilt? Has he said what paths he will no longer follow? Is he transparent?
I am sharing these thoughts not because I’m against Anwar. I have great admiration for him.
Anwar has stood against the greatest odds, he deserves a place in history. His family has stood by him; his wife and daughter have entered politics – and given a good account of themselves. He has many friends who stand by him.
I am sharing these thoughts because I sense we’re so desperate to be rid of Najib and his cronies, we’re at risk of failing to look at Anwar critically. It’s just a matter of time before unpleasant truths about Anwar are revealed. [This is what MCLM has been saying. This is what RPK has been saying.]
Both Najib and Anwar are fighting for the top job. They are very focused. Najib will make deals: remember Sibu?. Anwar will make deals: remember the kisses in Taiwan
We need to stop focusing on individuals. We know we are focusing on individuals when our responses swing between vilification and veneration: we either defame and abuse or we exalt and applaud. That's an indicator of our political maturity. The great good that has happened in the post-Mahathir era is the emergence of strong civil society groups: BERSIH, GMI, SABM, Tenaganita.
Anwar has been acquitted and freed. We need to continue to think in terms of issues and influence. We as individuals and groups need to set aside time and resources to influence our leaders, through activism. It’s not about Najib and Anwar. It’s not about saviours. It's about us. It's about how serious we are about change. We deserve the nation we get.
The judge walked into the court room, read the judgment in one minute, and disappeared into his chamber.
By the time the flabbergasted people in the court room recovered from their shock and realised what it all meant, they jumped in uncontrollable jubilation with shouts of joy, burst of tears, hugging, back-slapping, utterances of congratulations and thanks.
Within minutes, the same ecstatic outburst also came over the thousands of supporters gathered outside the court building. In fact, the sense of joy and emotional relief has quickly reverberated right across the nation, transcending race and religion.
Such was the high drama that greeted the totally unexpected acquittal of Anwar Ibrahim from the sodomy charge by Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah at the Kuala Lumpur High Court on January 9.
And such was the impact of this sensational Anwar story that it travels instantly around the globe with international TV channels like Al-Jazeera and BBC stopping their programmes to break the news, which no doubt has also brought relief and satisfaction to overseas pro-democracy and human rights bodies and well-wishers who had been anxiously awaiting the outcome of this sodomy trial.
No doubt the heightened sensation derived partly from the shock element of the verdict as no one had expected an acquittal. This is due to the fact that the trial had been so outrageously unjust and vindictive right from the start that everyone recognised it as political persecution and had anticipated a conviction and possibly instant jail on D-day, January 9. And so, imagine the joy of learning the opposite in such a dramatic fashion at the end of this long drawn ordeal.
It is common human experience that it is only when one is on the verge of losing a dear person that he discovers how much he loves that person.
And so it is with Anwar Ibrahim. The nationwide anxieties (expecting the worst scenario) that were steadily building up in the run up to judgment day, and the irrepressible smiling faces that appeared everywhere upon learning Anwar’s acquittal is the best testimony of the hitherto not so obvious truth that the nation has in fact all along treasured his leadership.
Such spontaneous response is also indication that Anwar’s indefatigable struggle to bring an end to the long antiquated and corrupt autocracy in this country, against unparalleled cruelty inflicted on him, has not gone unnoticed and unappreciated by the people, despite the regime’s high-handed media black-out on him all this time.
This wholly unanticipated finale to the three-and-a-half-year-long Anwar Sodomy II saga has far- reaching ramifications, and in fact transformed the political landscape and altered the balance of power between the challenger and the incumbent.
Anwar’s vindication of his innocence and his return to full political life from the precipice of a potentially lengthy prison term has brought the following consequences:
• It has spared Pakatan Rakyat the potential crisis of a leadership vacuum.
• On a personal level, it has revitalised Anwar and strengthened his position as the undisputed leader of the opposition group.
• It has enhanced his public image as prime minister-in-waiting who will lead Pakatan Rakyat to rid the country from the current quagmire of racial and religious dissension and economic malaise perpetrated by Barisan Nasional (BN).
• Having averted near catastrophe, Anwar’s new lease of political life will re-energise the Pakatan alliance and bring the component parties closer together as a compact fighting force.
• It has caused BN a disastrous set-back, for not only bringing a political plot that it has laboured for three-and-a-half years for naught, but also for damaging BN’s public image and credibility.
• It has demoralised BN and increased the risk of its fringe component parties deserting the mother ship.
• For whatever reason that precipitated this unexpected verdict — whether the last stage reversal was decided by the judge himself or by the political masters to avoid greater net loss of electoral support — such a disastrous finale has apparently deepened the conflict between the hardliners and reform-inclined faction within Umno.
The last point is important as it has the potential to cause an implosion in Umno — a thoroughly corrupted political party, void of political idealism, and characterized by its world famous brand of “money politics” and perennial in-fighting.
That there has been a last moment reversal is suggested by the following occurrences:
First, more than a week before D-day (January 9), blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin (RPK), long time Anwar loyalist, launched a vicious attack on Anwar, branding him a sodomite who was guilty as charged.
These attacks, which were widely publicised in Umno-control newspapers and TV channels, were recognised as a signal that Umno was still on-course to convict Anwar, and the RPK’s attack was a tactical move to pre-empt the potential backlash of an Anwar conviction.
Second, a few days before January 9, Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein hinted a softening of stance against the proposed “free Anwar” mass rally on January 9, when he suggested to Anwar’s party PKR to seek permission for the rally from the police, which had up to that point vowed to crack down harshly on it.
And to the surprise of everyone, the police promptly gave their consent upon its first meeting with PKR, despite having vehemently opposed it previously. In hindsight, that could be the point in time when the decision to convict Anwar was reversed, as it makes sense not to clash with Anwar’s supporters when Anwar was already destined to be acquitted.
Third, it is odd that the judge should give only a one-minute verdict at the final judgment, while it took him one hour and fifty minutes to deliver his lengthy judgment at the interim stage to establish the prima facie case.
A palpable explanation is that the one-minute verdict was a last moment decision. Alternatively, it could be the honest but sketchy script of a judge who finally could not bring himself to pass a judgment that would condemn him and his descendents to eternal infamy.
That Umno’s hardline faction has been rattled by the Anwar acquittal is seen in the uncharacteristically belated response of faction leaders deputy prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin and former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
As expected, both hypocritically claimed that the Anwar verdict was proof that the Executive had never interfered with the judiciary. Such manifestly untrue claims only re-confirm that these hardliners are still living in the past, grossly out of tune with the tempo of the Internet age.
These political dinosaurs belong to history. They don’t deserve to rule Malaysia.
No comments:
Post a Comment